Safety Concerns Ignored Prior to Tragic Titan Submersible Incident Exploring Titanic Wreckage

In a devastating turn of events, the ill-fated mission of the Titan submersible to explore the wreckage of the Titanic resulted in the loss of all lives on board. The US Coast Guard and OceanGate, the operators of the submersible, confirmed on Thursday that the five passengers aboard the Titan perished in a catastrophic explosion, as indicated by debris found on the ocean floor.

As the investigation into the incident unfolds, serious questions arise about the disregard and dismissal of safety concerns surrounding the design and operation of the vessel. While the exact cause of the implosion remains unknown, experts have identified several red flags regarding the Titan’s safety that were apparent prior to the ill-fated trip. Here are five crucial points of concern:

1. Unconventional choice of carbon fiber hull The Titan submersible consisted of two titanium domes connected by a five-inch-thick cylinder made of carbon fiber—a departure from the typical use of stronger materials like steel or titanium for deep-sea submersibles. Carbon fiber offers the advantages of lighter weight and lower cost. However, film director and deep-dive expert James Cameron warned that carbon fiber has “no strength in compression,” rendering it less reliable in extreme deep-sea conditions. OceanGate had been warned about the safety risks associated with this material, including the possibility of pressure cycling and the subsequent formation of larger tears in the hull.
2. Inadequate early-warning system OceanGate had developed an advanced acoustic monitoring system designed to detect hull failure and provide sufficient warning. However, concerns were raised about the effectiveness of this system, with claims that it would only offer minimal milliseconds of warning before a catastrophic implosion. A former OceanGate employee, David Lochridge, suggested non-destructive testing of the hull to ensure its strength and safety. However, his recommendations were allegedly dismissed by the company, which deemed the hull too thick for such testing.
3. Resistance to certification Reports suggest that the Titan submersible may not have undergone industry-standard safety testing. Journalist David Pogue, who boarded the vessel in 2022, revealed that he signed a waiver stating that the “experimental vessel” had not received approval or certification from any regulatory body. Lochridge’s court filings indicated that the vessel’s front viewport was only certified to a depth far shallower than that of the Titanic wreckage. Concerns were raised by the Marine Technology Society, as OceanGate appeared to have ignored industry guidelines for certification.
4. Dismissal of safety concerns Lochridge, the whistleblower who raised safety concerns about the submersible, faced adverse consequences for his actions. Shortly after submitting his safety report, he was fired and accused of sharing confidential information externally. Lochridge filed a lawsuit against the company, alleging retaliation for whistleblowing. His case highlighted a pattern, as other employees, including explorer Rob McCallum, also departed OceanGate due to concerns about safety practices and rushed production.
5. Previous safety incidents Court documents revealed that the Titan submersible experienced past incidents related to battery issues and even became lost for hours during a trip. These incidents raised further doubts about the reliability and operational integrity of the vessel. Additionally, it was disclosed that the submersible lacked an emergency location transmitter (ELT), a critical device for facilitating rescues in emergency situations.

As investigations continue, OceanGate is facing scrutiny over its handling of safety concerns and adherence to industry standards. The tragic loss of lives aboard the Titan submersible underscores the importance of robust safety protocols and diligent oversight in the exploration of extreme environments.